Methodological negativism is. Rejection of methodological individualism

Negativism is a fairly common condition of every person. IN in this case the patient rejects, does not accept the world, and constantly has a negative attitude towards life. Negativism can be a personality trait or a situational reaction. Psychiatrists often associate negativism with schizophrenia. Some believe that a person changes his attitude towards life when he experiences an age crisis. It can be observed in adolescence, as well as in children 3 years old. How does negativity ruin your life? What caused it? How dangerous is this condition?

Description

Sigmund Freud believed that negativism is a kind of psychological defense. Some associate the concept of negativism and nonconformism, when a person completely opposes the world, does not accept it as it is, refuses to recognize established procedures, traditions, values, laws. The opposite and not very pleasant state is conformism, when a person adapts to everyone else.

Psychologists associate two types of behavior with childhood. But a mature person already becomes independent. A person is considered an adult when he begins to use his freedom for very useful purposes - he loves and cares for someone, and performs worthy deeds.

Negativism is a peculiar perception of life, it seems gray, scary, all events are tragic, gloomy. This condition must be dealt with in a timely manner, otherwise it will negatively affect your lifestyle.

Reasons for negativism

For each person, this character trait is formed due to various external and internal factors. Most often, these are failures in hormonal background, heredity. The following points may also affect:

Physical helplessness.
There are no skills or strength to overcome difficulties.
Self-affirmation.
Revenge and hostility.

Symptoms

It is not difficult to find out about a person’s serious condition; it is immediately visible:

The appearance of thoughts that the world is imperfect.
Prone to constant worries.
Doesn't like people with positive thinking.
Instead of solving the problem, the patient lives through it.
Only negative information motivates the patient.
A person focuses only on the negative.

Psychologists were able to identify the factors that caused negative thinking:

Feelings of guilt appear.
, troubles.
Fear of losing everything you have.
No personal life.

When communicating with a person who has negative thinking, you need to be extremely careful and under no circumstances speak directly about his pathology. Everything can end in an unpredictable reaction. Each person must understand for himself what state he is in.

Types of Negative Perceptions

Active form

People do everything out of spite on purpose. Negativism worries 3-year-old children the most. Speech negativism is most often observed. The kids refuse to comply with any request. In an adult, pathology occurs during... When the patient is asked to turn around, he deliberately turns in the other direction. It is important to distinguish here negative attitude to life from stubbornness.

Passive form

The patient completely ignores requests and demands. This form accompanies catatonic schizophrenia. In this case, when a person wants to turn around, he experiences resistance and muscle tone increases.

Additionally, deep, communicative, behavioral negativism is distinguished. In the case of behavioral negativism, a person does everything in defiance. Superficial, communicative is expressed in the form of non-acceptance of the surrounding world, as well as a specific matter. With deep negativism, a person is outwardly positive, smiles, enjoys life, but inside he has a “storm” negative emotions”, which sooner or later may break out.

Features of children's negativism

A child first encounters negative thinking at the age of 3. During this period, he realizes that, independent of his mother, he can do everything on his own. It is at this age that children become very capricious and do not accept parental help. If measures are not taken in a timely manner, negativism will also be observed in preschoolers.

For some schoolchildren, negativity is accompanied by negativity, in which children refuse to communicate. What to do? Pay attention to how the child develops, rule out serious somatic problems, mental development. During a three-year crisis, speech negativism is a frequent manifestation. Sometimes this condition is also typical for children as young as 7 years old.

Attention! Children's negative thinking may be the first sign of mental pathology or personal trauma. If negativism persists during preschool age, it is necessary to urgently contact a specialist. It is at this time that different conflict situations at home, at school.

The teenage type of negativism occurs more clearly at the age of 16. As the child grows up, the symptoms disappear. If a teenager is very rebellious, you need to consult a psychologist.

Modern psychotherapists talk about age shifts in adolescents. There are cases when young people at the age of 22 begin to have a pessimistic attitude towards life. Sometimes negativism makes itself felt for the first time in old age or in case of constant failures. Some people acquire negative thinking during paralysis.

How to get rid of the problem?

To learn to think positively, you need to eliminate the cause of what torments you from the inside. If you can’t do it on your own, you need to consult a psychotherapist. He will cleanse your thoughts and help you learn to perceive the situation completely differently.

Remember, negativity spoils life, it destroys everything good in a person. Don't drive yourself into a corner, solve your problem. Can't handle it on your own? Don't hesitate to ask for help. Turn into an optimist, then life will improve, it will become much easier for you. Finally, you will begin to notice bright colors, and not gray everyday life. Learn to be happy!

Old institutionalism past and present

“Old” institutionalism, as an economic movement, arose at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. He was closely connected with the historical direction in economic theory, with the so-called historical and new historical school (F. List, G. Schmoler, L. Bretano, K. Bücher).

The most prominent representatives of “Old Institutionalism” are: John Galbraith, Thorstein Veblen (1857–1929), Wesley Claire Mitchell (1874–1948), John Maurice Clark (1884–1963), John Commons (1862–1945).

The main methodological features of traditional institutionalism include the following:

This principle is also referred to as institutional determinism. A person here is seen as a product of the society in which he lives. The most important characteristics society are the stereotypes of thinking and rules of behavior adopted in it, which are supra-individual in nature and form the individuals who form this society.

2. Denial of the principle of optimization. The assumption about stereotypes of thinking and habits as the main driver of economic behavior.

3. The principle of cumulative causation.

3. Reducing the main task of economics to “understanding” functioning of the economy, and not to forecasting and prediction.

4. Rejection of the approach to the economy as a (mechanically) equilibrium system and the interpretation of the economy as an evolving system governed by processes that are cumulative in nature. 5. Favorable attitude towards government intervention into a market economy.

However, the old institutionalists now find themselves somewhat disunited. Also, the works of old institutionalists are distinguished by significant interdisciplinarity, being, in fact, continuations of sociological, legal, and statistical research in their application to economic problems.

Among the modern “old” institutionalists we can highlight Warren Samuels, Geoffrey Hodgson, and James Stanfield.

2.2.Neo- or new institutional economic theory

First, we need to clarify the terms neo-institutional and new institutional theories, since they are interpreted differently in different publications. T. Eggertsson in the book “Institutions and Economic Behavior” proposes to distinguish between the concept of limited rationality of G. Simon, which, in his opinion, found its complete embodiment in the theory of transaction costs of O. Williamson, and the theories of R. Coase and D. North. Accordingly, he designates the first case as new institutional economics, and the second as neo-institutional theory. Skorobogatov’s manual proposes to accept these terms as equivalent, since they do not differ among the luminaries of neo- or new institutional theory themselves, such as R. Coase, D. North, O. Williamson, etc.

In accordance with the classification of Trauin Eggertsson, representatives of the movement, questioning the premise of utility-maximizing behavior of an economic person, proposing its replacement with the principle of satisfaction, form their own direction in institutionalism - New Institutional Economics, the representatives of which can be considered O. Williamson and G. Simon.

The main representatives of neo-institutionalism are: R. Coase, O. Williamson, D. North, A. Alchian, Simon G., L. Thévenot, Menard K., Buchanan J., Olson M., R. Posner, G. Demsetz, S. Pejovic, T. Eggertsson et al.

The predecessors of neo-institutionalism are the economists of the Austrian School, in particular Carl Menger and Friedrich von Hayek, who introduced the evolutionary method into economic science, and also raised the question of the synthesis of many sciences studying society.

Modern neo-institutionalism has its roots in the pioneering works of Ronald Coase, The Nature of the Firm, and The Problem of Social Cost.

The neo-institutionalists attacked first of all the provisions of neoclassicism, which constitute its defensive core.

1) The premise that exchange occurs without costs has been criticized. Criticism of this position can be found in Coase's early works. IN In the real economy, any act of exchange is associated with certain costs. Such exchange costs are called transaction costs. They are usually interpreted as “the costs of collecting and processing information, the costs of negotiations and decision-making, the costs of monitoring and legal protection of the execution of the contract.”

The concept of transaction costs contradicts the thesis of neoclassical theory that the costs of functioning of the market mechanism are equal to zero. This assumption made it possible not to take into account the influence of various institutions in the economic analysis. Therefore, if transaction costs are positive, it is necessary to take into account the influence of economic and social institutions on the functioning of the economic system.

2) Secondly, recognizing the existence of transaction costs, there is a need to revise the thesis about the availability of information. Recognition of the thesis about the incompleteness and imperfection of information opens up new prospects for economic analysis, for example, in the study of contracts.

3) Thirdly, the thesis about the neutrality of the distribution and specification of property rights has been revised. Subjects of economic activity and business organizations are no longer viewed as “black boxes”.

Within the framework of “modern” institutionalism, attempts are also being made to modify or even change the elements of the hard core of neoclassics. First of all, this is the neoclassical premise of rational choice; classical rationality is modified with the adoption of assumptions about bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior.

Despite the differences, almost all representatives of neo-institutionalism view institutions through their influence on the decisions made by economic agents.

The following fundamental tools related to the human model are used: methodological individualism, utility maximization, bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior.

XX century was a century of significant changes in the life of mankind. These changes affected the material, political and spiritual spheres public life.

The peculiarities of the spiritual life of society in different countries have given rise to its reflection in philosophical movements.

The leading philosophical movements of world philosophy of the 20th century. spoke: Marxism, pragmatism, neopositivism, neo-Thomism, phenomenology, personalism and structuralism, Freudianism and neo-Freudianism. A certain contribution to the development of philosophy was made by the “school of structural-functional analysis”, “ frankfurt school"etc.

The most significant features of modern Western philosophy are the following:

lack of organic unity, expressed in the emergence and transformation of numerous trends and schools polemicizing with each other, having their own problems, methods and ways of thinking, their own conceptual apparatus, etc.;
a claim to supra-partisanship and to the removal of the opposition between idealism and Marxism;
turning the problem of man into the central problem of philosophizing;
attempts, having mastered the methodology of some special sciences about man, to replace philosophy with these sciences;
the connection of some movements and schools with religion;
under the guise of demonstrating pluralism of opinions, a merciless fight against ideas that pose a threat to capitalism;
the dominance of the anti-dialectical image of philosophical thinking, expressed in direct hostility to dialectics and attempts to declare it opposite to science;
eclecticism;
contradictory attitude towards science, “scientism” and “anti-scientism”;
the spread of irrationalism, expressed in the desire to limit the possibilities of knowledge in order to give room to mysticism, in attempts to reduce philosophy to mythology and esoteric teachings;
loss of socio-historical optimism.

The emergence and development of positivism

Positivism- a widespread movement in philosophy, founded in the 30s. XIX century French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798 - 1857). In France, this trend was followed by E. Linttre and E. Renan. In England, positivism was represented in the works of John Stuart Mile (1806 - 1873) and Herbert Spencer (1820 - 1903). In Germany, the ideas of positivism were developed by Jacob Moleschott (1822 - 1893) and Ernst Haeckel (1834 - 1919), in Russia -
N.K. Mikhailovsky and P.L. Lavrov and others.

These philosophers belong to the “first positivism”. “Second positivism” is associated with the activities of E. Mach (1838 - 1916) and R. Avenarius (1843 - 1896), German scientists who called their philosophy empirio-criticism, as well as with the activities of the French scientist A. Poincaré (1854 - 1912).

The ideas of positivism were picked up and transformed in the works of Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970), Rudolf Carnap (1891 - 1970), Maurice Schlick (1882 - 1936), Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889 - 1851) and others.

The philosophy of these thinkers was called neopositivism. Subsequently, the ideas of representatives of neopositivism were developed in the works of postpositivists (K. Popper, I. Lakatos, T. Kuhn, etc.).

The program of positivism, taking into account its evolution, can be presented as follows:

knowledge must be freed from worldview and value interpretation;
all previous, traditional philosophy as doctrinaire-dogmatic, metaphysical, i.e., aimed at searching for the root causes and substantial principles and supersensible entities, must be abolished and replaced either directly by special sciences (science is a philosophy in itself), or by a review of the system of knowledge, teaching about the language of science;
one should abandon the extremes of materialism and idealism and take a third path.

As a body of philosophical ideas spread throughout the world, positivism has the following features:

In contrast to the subjective idealism of I. Kant, positivism refuses to recognize a priori knowledge as the only means of achieving true knowledge. As the only remedy scientific knowledge Positivists emphasize scientific methods.
Science is considered by positivists as a means of understanding and transforming the world. Positivists believe in the power of scientific rationality.
Positivists believe that science is capable of identifying what is natural in the processes of nature and society.
Positivism is characterized by a belief in progress.

The founder of positivism, Auguste Comte (1798 — 1857).

The main ideas of positivism are reflected in his six-volume work “Course positive philosophy"(1830 - 1842), in the work "The Spirit of Positive Philosophy" (1844) and in the work "The System of Positive Politics" (1852 - 1854).

According to O. Comte, science should limit itself to a description of reality and its objects and phenomena, abandoning attempts to reveal their essence.

In his work “A Course in Positive Philosophy,” Comte writes: “... I think I have discovered a great fundamental law, according to which, with invariable necessity, we can establish, both through our rational evidence and through a careful analysis of the past, historical reliability. This law consists in the fact that each of our basic concepts necessarily passes through three theoretically different stages: the theological or fictitious stage; metaphysical or abstract stage; the scientific or positive stage... Hence there are three types of philosophy, or central systems that generalize phenomena that are mutually exclusive. The first is the starting point necessary for human understanding... the third is a fixed and definite stage, and the second is destined to serve as a transit point.”

“At the theological stage, phenomena are considered to be the products of the direct and continuous action of supernatural agents, more or less numerous. At the metaphysical stage, they are explained by the action of abstract entities, ideas or forces (bodies are united thanks to “sympathy”, plants grow thanks to the “vegetative soul”, and society, as Moliere ironically put it to sleep thanks to “sleeping virtue”). Only at a positive stage human spirit, having realized the impossibility of achieving absolute knowledge, no longer asks what are the sources and destinies of the Universe, what are internal reasons phenomena, but seeks and discovers, combining reasoning with observation, their operating laws, i.e., unchanging connections of consistency and similarity.”

According to Comte, at the theological stage there is a predominance of force, as, for example, in feudalism, the metaphysical stage is characterized by revolutions and reforms, for example, the reformation of Christianity, the positive stage is characterized by the emergence of an industrial society with its endless freedom of consciousness.

« This is the law of three stages - key concept Comte's philosophy. This law also confirms human development (each of us is a theologian in childhood, a metaphysician in youth and a physicist in adulthood).” This law, according to Comte, is applicable to explain the development of a wide variety of phenomena in social life.

According to O. Comte, in order to overcome the crisis state of society, it must be studied with the help of science. At the same time, “scientific sociology is called upon to become the only solid foundation for the reorganization of society and overcoming the social and political crises that nations have been experiencing for a long time.” The term "sociology" was introduced by Comte. He considered himself the creator of this science.

According to Comte, sociology completes the body of sciences, which he divides into abstract, or general, and concrete, or particular. He includes mathematics, theoretical astronomy (celestial mechanics), physics, chemistry, physiology (biology), sociology (social physics) as abstract sciences.

According to Comte, the purpose of science is the study of laws, since only their knowledge makes it possible to foresee events and direct our activities to change life in the desired direction; knowledge of the law is necessary for foresight, and a forecast is required to determine the amount of effort that should be expended to achieve social goals . In other words, for Comte, science is necessary for foresight, and foresight is necessary for optimizing action.

Comte believed that the transition of society from a state of crisis to “social order” would require knowledge of social laws based on an analysis of facts. According to the ideas of the founder of positivism, just as physics reveals the laws natural phenomena So sociology, through observation and reasoning, reveals the laws of social phenomena. He distinguishes social statics and social dynamics in sociology. That part of sociology, which is called social statics, studies phenomena that are the same for all societies. Social statics is designed to identify connections between various aspects of life, including cultural, economic and political. Social dynamics studies the laws of social development. The main ones here, according to Comte, are: the law of three stages and the law of progress.

The creator of sociology reflects on various problems.

“However, his entire sociology, if summarized, consists of the following four points:

Social statistics studies the conditions of Order, dynamics studies the laws of Progress;
Human progress took place in accordance with naturally necessary stages; the history of mankind is the unfolding of human nature;
Although human development moves from the theological to the positive stage, Comte did not devalue tradition. The past is pregnant with the present, and “humanity consists more of the dead than the living”;
Social physics is a necessary basis for rational politics.”

The thinker believed that these laws can only be identified through observations, experiments and comparisons. Important role at the same time, in his opinion, the historical method plays a role, which forms solid foundation for making political decisions and building the logic of political events.

O. Comte's ideas had an impact great influence on the creativity of many scientists working in the field social philosophy and sociology.

The founder of positivism in England was John Stuart Mill. (1806-1873).

His work “The System of Silogistic and Inductive Logic” (1830-1843) established him as the head of English positivism. His other most significant works are: the treatise “On Freedom” (1859), in which Mil formulated the principles of bourgeois individualism; Utilitarianism" (1861), where he put forward updated ideas about the ethics of utilitarianism; “An Inquiry into the Philosophy of Sir Hamilton...” (1865) and the posthumously published “Three Essays on Religion: Nature. The benefits of religion. Theism" (1874), in which he appeared as a person who believes in God.

The first work, “System of Logic...”, was devoted to the presentation of inductive logic. He often expanded logic to the scale of epistemology and saw in it the methodology and basis of the logic of the moral sciences, by which he understood the social sciences.

As noted German philosopher Heinrich Rickert: “J. S. Mill was the first to attempt to create a systematic logic of the mental sciences.” Among the moral or social sciences, Mill thought psychology was fundamental. “It is psychology, according to Mill, that is possible as an exemplary inductive science, whereas social science inevitably acquire a deductive character, trying to explain the varieties of social behavior of specific people with the help of general laws found inductively.”

According to Mill, the closest thing to psychology is ethology based on it, understood as the “science of character formation,” which deductively derives from psychological laws the laws of character formation and their forms. These laws express various physical and psychological circumstances, which give the characters individual traits.

According to Mill, history helps clarify the laws of society. However, Mill “warned against naively accepting the first “historical evidence” that comes along, some actual “uniformity of the historical sequence of social states” as a true law of nature, whereas such uniformity should be considered only an “empirical law,” i.e., the law of nature itself. lower level generality, the law as a first approximation.” Empirical laws must still be brought to laws more high degree community. The reduction of “primary historical and sociological generalizations to a series of laws of a higher degree of generality is the essence of Mill’s “reverse deductive or historical method", which he considered the most important and most reliable of his "methods social science" According to Mill, the main task of social science is to find the laws according to which any given state of society causes another to follow and replace it. Open social laws make it possible to formulate rules for activities that meet the requirements of these laws. But we must act in this direction carefully, and “that general principle, with which everyone must conform rules of thumb, and the sign that must be used to test them is the promotion of the happiness of humanity, or rather of all sentient beings, in other words; the ultimate principle of teleology is the increase of happiness.”

To others Herbert Spencer was a major positivist in England (1820 — 1903).

He spent a significant part of his life as an armchair scientist. From 1862 to 1896 he published 10 volumes of the “synthetic philosophy” system, which includes “Fundamental Principles” ((1862), a book about the first principles of being), “Foundations of Biology” (1864 - 1867), “Sociology as a Subject of Study” (1873), “Foundations Psychology" (1879 - 1893), "Foundations of Sociology" (in 3 volumes, 1876 - 1896), "Foundations of Ethics". In 1850, his “Social Statistics” was published.

Spencer sought to prove the compatibility of science and religion. He believed that science helps religion cleanse itself of mysticism.

Spencer considered philosophy as knowledge at the stage of maximum generalization, since philosophical generalizations unite and systematize the achievements of all sciences. According to Spencer, philosophy must begin with the most general principles to which science has arrived. These, in his opinion, are the principles of the indestructibility of matter, continuity of movement, and force resistance. These principles should be used by all sciences. However, they can be unified into a more general principle - the principle of “continuous redistribution of matter and motion.” The law of general change is the law of evolution.

The term “evolution” was first used by Spencer in 1857. Two years later, Darwin in “The Origin of Species” would use this concept in relation to living beings. However, Spencer talks about the evolution of the Universe. “Its first characteristic is the transition from a less connected form to a more connected one.” The second characteristic is the transition from a homogeneous bound state to a heterogeneous unbound state. “The third characteristic of evolution is the transition from the indeterminate to the determinate.” Spencer noted that evolution is the integration of matter accompanied by the dispersion of motion; in it matter passes from an indefinite and unrelated autonomy to a definite and connected homogeneity.”

Spencer identified three phases of “greater evolution”: inorganic, organic and supraorganic (or superorganic), smoothly transitioning into each other. However, each phase at a certain stage of maturity acquires a new quality of complexity and cannot be reduced to another. Social evolution is part of supraorganic evolution, which implies the interaction of many individuals, coordinated collective activity, which in its consequences exceeds the capabilities of any individual actions. The subject of sociology is “the study of evolution (development) in its most complex form.”

In relation to society, evolution is expressed in the fact that “the growth of society, both in terms of its numbers and strength, is accompanied by an increase in the heterogeneity of its political and economic organization. The same applies to all scientific-historical products and other products - language, science, art and literature." This is the essence of Spencer's understanding of progress.

On German soil, as is believed in Russian literature, positivism found expression in the empirio-criticism or “second positivism” of Richard Avenarius (1843 - 1896).

Another major representative of the “second positivism” was Ernst Mach (1838 - 1916).

These thinkers tried to “overcome” the shortcomings of materialism and objective idealism in the theory of knowledge by moving to the position subjective idealism. They saw the source of knowledge in the analysis of sensations, which were considered outside of connection with the material world.

Neopositivism

Neopositivism(“logical atomism”, “logical positivism”, “analytic philosophy”, “logical empiricism”) is widespread philosophical movement. Within the framework of this movement, the ideas of “first positivism” and “second positivism” were developed.

“Logical positivism originated in the so-called “Vienna Circle”, which was formed in the early 20s. under the leadership of M. Schlick (1882 - 1936), which included L. Wittgenstein, R. Carnap, F. Frank, O. Neurath, G. Hahn and others. Along with the “Vienna Circle” and the Berlin “Society for Empirical Philosophy” ( G. Reichenbach) in the 30s. arose: a group of “analysts” in England (J. Ryle and others); Lviv-Warsaw school in Poland
(K. Tvardovsky, K. Aidukevich, A. Tarsky).

General feature of neopositivism, most often called today " analytical philosophy", a detailed study of language in order to clarify philosophical problems. B. Russell (1872 - 1970) and L. Wittgenstein (1989 - 1951) are considered the most prominent representatives of analytical philosophy. Russell lived long life and wrote many works. In collaboration with A. Whitehead, he published the fundamental work “Principles of Mathematics” (1910). Later he independently wrote “Analysis of Consciousness” (1921), “A Study of Meaning and Truth” (1940), “ Human cognition, its scope and boundaries" (1950), "History Western philosophy"(1948), etc.

B. Russell, being a major mathematician, made a great contribution to the application of logical analysis to the study of the foundations of mathematics. He believed that it was important to clarify the meaning of words and sentences that constitute knowledge by transforming less clear provisions into clearer ones. He applied the method of logical analysis to philosophy. In his works “Our Knowledge outside world"(1914) and "Logical Atomism" (1924), he put forward the idea that with the help of logic one can reveal the essence of philosophy.

It should be noted that as a philosopher, B. Russell did not limit his interests to just the logical analysis of language. He made a significant contribution to the study of problems in the theory of knowledge, social philosophy and ethics.

B. Russell's student Ludwig Wittgenstein is considered one of the most original thinkers of the 20th century. He is the author of the Logical-Philosophical Treatise (1921) and Philosophical Investigations. The philosopher's texts are composed of numbered fragments. In the first essay he used the method of logical analysis, and in the second - the method of linguistic analysis.

IN " Logical-philosophical treatise“The world is presented as a set of facts. The latter act as events, which in turn consist of objects and are their possible configurations. Events are narrated by logical atoms—elementary statements. An idea of the world and a picture of the world are formed from facts. Statements about all this are possible, constituting the content of knowledge.

The understanding of the term “philosophy” was subjected to an unusual interpretation in this work. Wittgenstein considers philosophy only a means of logical clarification of thoughts. Philosophy, in his opinion, is not a doctrine, but an activity to clarify and clarify thoughts. According to Wittgenstein, in order to philosophize, it is not necessary to speak, since the demonstration of silence, in a certain case, can also be a philosophical attitude towards reality.

Dissatisfaction with his attempt to reflect the “picture” of the world in language as clearly and accurately as he wanted led the thinker to create the treatise “Philosophical Investigations”. In this essay, the logical analysis of language is replaced by its linguistic analysis. It considers language not as a logical “double” opposite to the world, but as a means of relating to the world in the course of its use with elements of creativity and play. At the same time, language games are considered as a method of discovering opportunities. Philosophy in this work acts as a means of teaching thinking.

Other representatives of neopositivism R. Carnap, F. Frank, G. Reichenbach, K. Hempel and others also made a significant contribution to the development of the theory of knowledge and philosophy of science. At the same time, a significant increase in knowledge was made about the essence and purpose of the language of science, about the logic of the development of scientific knowledge and the mechanisms of its growth, about the functions of science, about the criteria for assessing knowledge, etc.

Historians of philosophy, when analyzing the constructions of positivism, pay special attention to the consideration by representatives of this movement of the question of testing the truth of knowledge. The process of establishing the truth of scientific statements is carried out by neopositivists using the principle of verification, which means establishing the truth of scientific statements as a result of their empirical verification. In accordance with this principle, any scientifically meaningful statement about the world should provide the possibility of reducing it to a set of statements that record data sensory experience. For example, the truth of the sentence: “This house is made of panels” is established from visual contact with it. Those statements that cannot be reduced to the data of sensory experience and find confirmation in it, for example, “time is irreversible” or “motion is a form of existence of matter,” are treated by neopositivists as pseudo-sentences and denote pseudo-problems. This principle seemed insufficiently effective, which served as a reason for its abandonment by representatives of the “fourth positivism”, or post-positivism.

Postpositivism

Since the 60s. XX century The concepts of postpositivism, or, as it is sometimes called, “fourth positivism,” become the most significant for logical and methodological research. Continuing the search for positivism in the field of increasing scientific character and the rigor of philosophy, its representatives, the most famous of whom are K. Popper (1902 - 1994), T. Kuhn (born in 1922),
I. Lakatos (1922 - 1974), P. Feyerabend (born in 1924), clarify the theory of the development of knowledge. In contrast to logical positivism, which accepted the principle of verification as a criterion for scientificity, K. Popper puts forward the principle of falsifiability. Emphasizing that modern scientific knowledge is extremely abstract in nature, that many of its provisions cannot be raised to sensory experience, he argues that the main thing for determining scientificity is not confirmation, but the possibility of refuting the provisions of science: if it is possible to find conditions under which protocol ( i.e., the basic, primary) propositions of the theory are false, then the theory is refutable. And this is no coincidence, because not a single one scientific theory does not accept all the facts, but affirms some and denies, excluding others that do not correspond to its basic provisions. Therefore, in principle, a situation is possible when facts are discovered that contradict the theory, and it turns out to be incorrect. If there is no experimental refutation, the theory is considered “justified.”

Absolutizing the factor of the relative truth of knowledge, Popper puts forward the position that only those theories that can, in principle, be refuted are considered scientific, and that falsifiability is a fundamental property of scientific knowledge.

By asserting that any scientific theory is interested in being refuted, Popper absolutized a characteristic truly inherent in the process of scientific development. It is not a simple quantitative accumulation of facts within the framework of a single theory that explains the laws of the universe or the addition of new theories to old ones, but a consistent process of changing theoretical structures that differ significantly from each other, often fundamentally rejecting previous scientific explanations.

Popper painted a vivid and dramatic picture of scientific life, in which there is a struggle between theories, their selection and evolution. He believed that if a theory is refuted, it should be immediately discarded and a new one put forward, therefore scientific life represents a field of struggle for theories that can rise only through the “killing” of those opposing them.

It should be noted that for postpositivism, talking about the scientific nature of theories is not the same thing as talking about their truth. Thus, although truth, according to Popper, exists objectively, it is in principle unattainable due to the conjectural, and ultimately false (since every theory will be refuted) nature of any knowledge. Human knowledge can only create more or less plausible theories.

Popper's views on cognition have differences with those characteristic of supporters of neopositivism. These differences are as follows: 1) neopositivists considered the data of sensory experience to be the source of knowledge; for Popper, any sources of knowledge are equal; Popper does not distinguish, as neopositivists do, the terms empirical and theoretical knowledge; 2) neopositivists as a criterion for demarcation between true and false knowledge they put forward verifiability, i.e. testability, and Popper put forward falsifiability, i.e. falsifiability;
3) neopositivists sought to discredit the importance of metaphysics, and Popper was tolerant of it; 4) logical positivists singled out induction as the main method of science, and Popper - the trial and error method, including only deductive reasoning; 5) for logical positivists, the philosophy of science comes down to a logical analysis of the language of science, and for Popper - to an analysis of the process of development of knowledge; 6) many representatives of neopositivism
(R. Carnap, K. Hempel, etc.) allowed the application of the idea of the natural to the phenomena of social life, and K. Popper in his works “ Open Society and His Enemies" (1945) and "The Poverty of Historicism" (1944) proved the opposite.

Popper's ideas about the process of development of science were criticized by one of his followers - T. Kuhn, who in the book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” puts forward his own model of its development. Kuhn introduces the concepts of scientific community and paradigm. The scientific community is a group of scientists and professionals united by a common scientific paradigm - a model for solving scientific problems and selecting significant problems. The scientific paradigm also includes an understanding of the picture of the world, the general values of scientific research, and teaching patterns. Thus, as an example, Kuhn cites the paradigms of Newton, Lavoisier, and Einstein.

During the period of “normal science,” the principles of the paradigm are not questioned, and research is carried out within its framework. However, with the development of science within the framework of the paradigm, anomalies, facts contradicting it, or paradoxes of the paradigm itself are discovered that cannot be solved by its own means. The period is coming scientific revolution, during which the old paradigm is discarded and a new one is selected from alternative possibilities. It was during this period, according to Kuhn, that the principle of falsification works.

However, Kuhn denies the principle of continuity and progressive development of knowledge, putting forward the position of the incommensurability of paradigms and the impossibility of comparing their level of truth.

Another option for the development of scientific knowledge was proposed by I. Lakatos in the book “Falsification and Methodology of Research Programs”. The main unit for describing the model of scientific development is the “research program,” which consists of a “hard core,” a “protective belt,” and a set of methodological rules—“negative heuristics,” which determine the preferred paths of research. The "hard core" is considered within the research program as consisting of irrefutable statements. In this case, the “protective belt” serves as a means of protecting the “hard core” from refutation. However, it itself changes and improves thanks to the rules of “positive heuristics”, as well as with the help of falsification and confirmation. According to Lakatos, a research program develops progressively when its theoretical growth anticipates its empirical growth. If the opposite is observed, then it regresses.

Researchers believe that the concept proposed by Lakatos is more advanced, as it offers a deeper understanding of the dynamism of scientific development. The development of science is presented by the philosopher as a gradual process of growth of knowledge based on scientific activity, based on developing research programs.

A different point of view on the development of science was presented by P. Feyerabend. His main works include the following: “Against the Method. Essay on the anarchist theory of knowledge" (1975); Science in a Free Society (1978); "Goodbye to Reason" (1987). The philosopher believes that the development of scientific knowledge and science is carried out through mutual criticism of incompatible theories in the face of existing facts. Scientific work, according to Feyerabend, should be aimed at creating alternative theories and conducting polemics between them. In this case, it is necessary, in his opinion, to follow, on the one hand, the principle of proliferation, which means that it is necessary to invent and develop concepts that are incompatible with existing theories recognized by the scientific community, and on the other hand, the principle of incommensurability, which states that theories cannot be compared.

Feyerabend opposed the dictate of methodologies and the recognition of any rules in scientific research. He put forward the opinion that science is no different from myth.

It should be noted that Feyerabend’s revolt against rationalism in knowledge means a revolt against science, since the irresponsible equalization of the rights of pseudoscientific constructions and the results of the activities of professional scientists would mean the end of scientific progress, and after this the end of technical and social progress at all.

Human activity in any form (scientific, practical, etc.) is determined by a number of factors. Its final result depends not only on who acts (subject) or what it is aimed at (object), but also on how this process is carried out, what methods, techniques, means are used. These are the problems of the method. Now we will talk about methods of scientific knowledge.

Method(Greek - way of cognition) - a path to something, a way to achieve a goal, a certain way of ordering the activity of a subject in any of its forms.

Main function of the method -~ internal organization and regulation of the process of cognition or practical transformation of a particular object. Consequently, the method (in one form or another) comes down to To a set of certain rules, techniques, methods, norms of cognition and action. It is a system of instructions, principles, requirements that should guide the researcher in solving a specific problem, achieving a certain result in a particular field of activity. The method disciplines the search for truth, saves energy and time (if it is correct), and allows you to move towards the goal in the shortest way. The true method not only serves as a kind of compass along which the subject of cognition and action makes his way, but also helps to avoid mistakes.

Scientific method is understood as “a goal-oriented approach, a way through which a given goal is achieved. This is a complex of various cognitive approaches and practical operations aimed at acquiring scientific knowledge In psychology and pedagogy, the scientific method is a system of approaches and methods that correspond to the subject and objectives of a given science.

The concept of “method” is used in the broad and narrow senses of the word. IN in a broad sense The word it denotes a cognitive process that includes several methods. For example, the method of theoretical analysis includes, in addition to the latter, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, etc. In a narrow sense, the method means special techniques scientific discipline. For example, in psychology and pedagogy - the method of scientific observation, the survey method, the experimental method, etc.

At all times, the importance of the method of cognition was highly appreciated by all researchers. Thus, Francis Bacon compared the method to a lamp illuminating the way for a traveler in the dark, and believed that one cannot count on success in studying any issue by following the wrong path. The philosopher sought to create a method that could be an “organon” (instrument) of knowledge and provide man with dominance over nature. As such a method, he considered induction, which requires science to proceed from empirical analysis, observation and experiment in order to understand causes and laws on this basis.

R. Descartes called the method “exact And simple rules”, the observance of which contributes to the growth of knowledge, makes it possible to distinguish the false from the true. He said it was better not to think about searching for any truths, than to do this without any method, especially without a deductive-rationalistic one.

A significant contribution to the methodology of scientific knowledge was made by the German classical (Hegel) And materialist (Marx) philosophy, developed quite deeply dialectical method on idealistic and materialistic foundations, respectively.

A whole series of fruitful, original (and in many ways not yet mastered) methodological ideas were formulated by representatives of Russian philosophy. These are, in particular, ideas about the inseparability of method and truth And the inadmissibility of “neglecting the method” (Herzen and Chernyshevsky); about “organic logic” and its method - dialectics (Vladimir Solovyov); about “methodological naivety”, about dialectics as “the rhythm of questions and answers” (P. Florensky); about the laws of logic as properties of being itself, and not the subject, not “thinking”, about the need to “overcome the nightmare of formal logic” by the need to liberate scientific knowledge “from the nightmare of mathematical natural science” (Berdyaev and others).

The important role of method for human activity has been emphasized by many prominent scientists. Thus, the outstanding physiologist I.P. Pavlov wrote: “Method is the very first, main thing. The seriousness of the research depends on the method, on the method of action. It's all about good method. With a good method, even a not very talented person can do a lot. And with a bad method and man of genius will work in vain and will not receive valuable, accurate data" 1. Our famous psychologist L. S. Vygotsky said that methodology as a set of methods of scientific knowledge is like “the backbone in the animal’s body” on which this entire organism rests.

Consequently, the method of scientific knowledge is certainly an important and necessary thing. However, it is unacceptable to go to extremes: firstly, to underestimate the method and methodological problems, considering all this an insignificant matter that “distracts” from real work, genuine science, etc.

(methodological negativism); secondly, to exaggerate the importance of the method, considering it more important than the subject to which they want to apply it, turning the method into a kind of “universal master key” for everything And everything, in a simple and accessible “tool” scientific discovery(“methodological euphoria”). The fact is that not a single methodological principle can exclude, for example, the risk of reaching a dead end in the course of scientific research.

V. P. Kokhanovsky claims that “any method will be ineffective and even useless if it is used not as a “guiding thread” in scientific or other forms of activity, but as a ready-made template for repainting facts. The main purpose of any method is based on the relevant principles (requirements, instructions, etc.) to ensure the successful solution of certain cognitive and practical problems, the increase in knowledge, the optimal functioning and development of certain objects” 2.

In this regard, the following must be kept in mind.

1. The method, as a rule, is not applied in isolation; it itself to myself, and in combination, interaction with others. This means that the final result of scientific activity is largely determined by how skillfully and effectively the heuristic potential of each side of a particular method and all methods in their interrelation is used “in practice.” Each element of the method does not exist on its own, but as a side of the whole, and is applied as a whole. This is why methodological pluralism is very important, i.e. the ability to master a variety of methods and their skillful application. Special significance has the ability to master opposing methodological approaches and their correct combination.

2. The universal basis, the “core” of the system of methodological knowledge is philosophy as a universal method. Its principles, laws and categories determine general direction and research strategy, “permeate” all other levels of methodology, being uniquely refracted and embodied in a specific form at each of them. IN scientific research One cannot limit oneself only to philosophical principles, but it is also unacceptable to leave them “overboard” as something that does not belong to the nature of a given activity. Obviously, if philosophy is understood as the search for knowledge in its most general, broadest form, then it can be considered “the mother of all scientific searches.” History of knowledge And practitioners have confirmed this conclusion.

3. In its application, any method is modified depending on specific conditions, the purpose of the study, the nature of the problems being solved, the characteristics of the object, a particular area of application of the method (nature, society, cognition), the specifics of the patterns being studied, the originality of phenomena and processes (material or spiritual , objective or subjective), etc. Thus, the content of the system of methods used to solve certain problems is always specific, because in each case the content of one method or system of methods is modified in accordance with the nature of the process under study.

Levels of negativism

Woody Allen once wrote that two elderly ladies were vacationing at a resort in the Catskills, and one said: “The food here is so bad.” And the second added: “And don’t talk! The portions are also small.” Allen wrote that he felt about the same about life. Negativism, as a manifestation of a negative attitude, manifests itself both totally and selectively - at different levels - communicative, behavioral or deep (without external manifestations).

Negativism is communicative (superficial): at the level of words, people swear, object and blame. At the same time, with regard to relationships and affairs, this can be a “negative” person, or a positive one, or a loving one, or a constructive one.

Behavioral negativism: a person refuses or does the opposite, contrary to demands and requests.

Passive negativism: a person ignores requests and demands.

Active negativism (protest) - a person does everything exactly the opposite, no matter what is asked of him.

Negativism can also manifest itself in relation to society or to a group: a person feels that these people suppress his individuality, and he tries to do everything “differently from others.”

If you know the symptoms of negativism, you may not allow it to develop in you.

So, the symptoms of negativism include:

Tendency to worry and whine.
Dislike for a person with a positive outlook.
Philosophical thoughtfulness about how imperfect the world is.